On 29 September 2016, the government introduced the All Families Are Equal Act which, if passed into law, would ensure all couples who use assisted reproduction to conceive, including the use of a surrogate, are legally recognized as parents [R1.1].

On 28 February 2019, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court dismissed a challenge from elementary teachers and a civil liberties group over the Progressive Conservative government's repeal of a modernized sex-ed curriculum. The EFTO argued that changes made by the government infringed teachers' freedom of expression and put students at risk by failing to be inclusive. The Court said that it is the role of elected officials, not the courts, to make legislation and policy decisions [C1.6], [R1.5].

On 19 December 2018, the City of Hamilton councillors reportedly voted to drop the plan to appeal the 04 October court ruling in favour of the Christian Heritage Party over bus shelter ads aimed at transgender rights. The city has to pay the party $44,000, plus its own legal costs [R1.4].

On 04 October 2018, Justices Ruth Mesbur, Michael Varpio and Frederick Myers in the Superior Court of Justice Divisional Court reportedly ruled that the Christian Heritage Party has a right to engage in political speech, even if some find that speech offensive. The decision strikes down a city decision to remove the bus shelter ads the city considered transphobic and offensive. The ads depicted someone who appeared to be male entering a door marked ''Ladies Showers'' [R1.3].

On 22 November 2017, Sharpe J. A. in the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of E.T. who sought to be notified by the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board of any classroom instruction or discussion of various issues such as ''moral relativism'', ''environmental worship'', ''instruction in sex education'', and ''discussion or portrayals of homosexual/bisexual conduct and relationships and/or transgenderism as natural, healthy or acceptable'' so that he could decide whether or not to withdraw his children from those classes or activities [C1.2], [R1.1].

On 01June 2017, the ''Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act of 2017'' (Bill 89), was passed 63-23 (and received Royal Assent). The Act requires courts, social workers, and adoption services to consider ''race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression'' when making decisions concerning a child's welfare. That would include removing children from homes where parents oppose a child's embrace of homosexuality or ''gender'' choice [C1.2], [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

In January 2001, Justice Theo Wolder of the Ontario Court of Justice in Brampton ruled that "the applicant’s transsexuality, in itself, without further evidence, would not constitute a material change in circumstances, nor would it be considered a negative factor in custody determination" [R2.2].

In July 1997, an Ontario court granted lesbian mother custody of her son and ordered her ex-lover, Margaret Buist, to make child-support payments. The ruling allows the woman to leave (sic) move to another state to take a job [R2.1].

On 27 September 2015, it was reported that the Toronto Transit Commission had removed all adverts for the cruising website Squirt 'as it promoted sex in public places, which is against the law'. The ads showed three shirtless men embracing. [R1.1].

In October 1999, The Ontario government passed legislation complying with a Supreme Court of Canada decision that said laws that treat opposite-sex relationships differently from gay and lesbian relationships are unconstitutional. Same-sex partners now have the same rights and responsibilities in Ontario as common-law heterosexual couples [R1.1].

On 07 January 2013, Justice Ruth Mesbur in the Superior Court of Justice ruled in the divorce case of Wayne Hincks v. Gerardo Gallardo that it would be "impermissible discrimination" not to view their UK civil partnership, in exactly the same way as a fully married husband and wife [R3.10].

In June 2003, Justice Ellen Macdonald recently ordered the 47-year-old man, referred to as CR, to pay interim support to his alleged same-sex partner RR, 46, until the pair's dispute can be determined on a final basis at a trial [R3.9].

In August 2002, after a Treasury Board employee was refused leave for a committment ceremony her complaint of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation to the Human Rights Commission was referred to the Human Rights Tribunal [R3.8].

A similar complaint by a Nova Scotia man will be heard at the same time.

In May 2000, the Supreme Court has rejected an Ontario government request to review a landmark decision on gay rights [R3.7].

In September 1999, Ontario's provincial court judges received C$40,000 wage hikes and full homosexual spousal recognition for their benefit packages [R3.6].

On 20 May 1999, Canada's Supreme Court gave Ontario six months to amend its laws to allow same-sex couples, saying the province's definition of a spouse as a person of the opposite sex is unconstitutional [C3.5], [R3.4].

In May 1998, the Court of Appeal, rewrote a piece of the federal Income Tax Act 23 April to recognise same-sex couples [R3.3].

In December 1996, in a 2-1 ruling, the court of Appeal said family law must be applied equally to same- and opposite-sex couples, allowing gay men and lesbians to sue ex-partners for financial support in the same way as heterosexuals [R3.2].

In February 1996, Ontario Court General Division Justice Gloria Epstein rewrote that province's Family Law Act last month so its alimony and child-support provisions apply to gay and lesbian couples. Support obligations will arise when a couple has lived together for at least three years or the relationship has developed "some permanence" and resulted in children [R3.1].

In 2002, the Ontario Human Rights Commission implemented a policy to accept complaints based on gender identity, although it had not been incorporated into law [R1.3].

In February 2000, jokes that demean gays and lesbians were defined as harassment under a new sexual orientation policy by the Ontario Human Rights Commission [R1.2].

On 16 December 1986, the provincial legislature passed Bill 7, an amendment to the Ontario Human Rights Code (OHRC) prohibiting discrimination against gay and lesbian people [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 30 May 2014, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal ruled that the London Trails End farmers market and general manager Victor Desa discriminated against business proprietor Karen Clarke-McIlwain by demanding she fire her transgender worker Daniella Freeman, awarding the pair damages for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect in the sum of $20,000 and $10,000 respectively [C2.3], [R2.2].

In May 2004, Superior Court Judge Russell Juriansz ruled that the mandatory submission of films and (gay) videos to the Ontario Film Review Board for its approval prior to their distribution and exhibition, infringe on the fundamental freedom of expression guaranteed by Canadian Constitution [R2.1].

Justice Juriansz stayed his ruling for one year to allow the Government to amend the law. If it does not, or decides in the next 30 days to appeal, the ruling will go into effect. [R2.1].

On 24 August 2011, lawyer Charles B. Wagner expressed the view that as in Canada today same-sex marriages are legal, it is therefore entirely possible that an Ontario court would set aside a provision in a Will that disinherited someone because of his/her sexual orientation, on the grounds that such disinheritance offended public policy [R1.4].

On 12 June 2003, Justice Ellen Macdonald ordered a 47-year-old man, referred to as CR [Collin Reaney], to pay interim support to his alleged same-sex partner RR [Robert Ross], 46, until the pair's dispute can be determined on a final basis at a trial [C1.3], [R1.2].

On 20 May 1999, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled [in M. v. H.] that, for the purposes of support under the Family Law Act, a spouse includes " either of two persons ". The court ruled that limiting the definition of 'spouse' to heterosexual couples, for the purposes of support, was discriminatory and not justifiable [C1.1].

On 01June 2017, the ''Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act of 2017'' (Bill 89), was passed 63-23 (and received Royal Assent). The Act requires courts, social workers, and adoption services to consider ''race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression'' when making decisions concerning a child's welfare. That would include removing children from homes where parents oppose a child's embrace of homosexuality or ''gender'' choice [C1.8], [R1.7].

On 26 January 2015, it was reported that Yasir Naqvi, Ontario's minister of community safety and correctional services announced a revised policy underwhich inmates will be placed in facilities that take into account their own gender identity and preferences, be referred to by their chosen name and pronouns (such as he, her or the gender-neutral ze), be able to retain prosthesis used for gender expression and have a choice in the gender of staff performing searches [R1.6].

On 09 October 2012, the Ontario Government Services website was reported to have notified that people no longer require full sex reassignment surgery to change birth certificate gender. All that is required in an application is a signed declaration and a note from a doctor or psychologist. The only caveats for changing a birth certificate is that the applicant must be 18 years of age. The cost for editing the designated gender is $37, plus the $25 or $35 fee for ordering the new birth certificate – either short form or long form [R1.5].

On 13 June 2012, the Human Rights Code was updated to add the terms "gender identity" and "gender expression" to prevent discrimination against transgender people upon receiving Royal Assent [R1.4].

On 10 May 2012, Bill 33 (Toby's Act) passed through the provincial legislature second reading and now goes to the Social Policy Committee before return to the legislature for a final vote [L1.3], [R1.2].

As at 18 December 2011, the government requires a medical letter confirming sexual reassignment surgery (SRS) before allowing a change of gender identity in a birth certificate [R1.1].

However: see 2. Court & Tribunals [C2.3], [R2.2]

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 11 April 2012, the Ontario Human Rights Tribunal struck down a rule that required trans people to undergo transexual surgery in order to change the sex category on their birth certificate [C2.3], [R2.2].

In November 2002, the Ontario Human Rights Commission implemented a policy to accept complaints based on gender identity, although it had not been incorporated into law [R2.1].

In 1998, an Ontario man was reportedly convicted of hate crimes for an incident in which he distributed pamphlets about Islam outside a high school. In one of the pamphlets, defendant Mark Harding listed atrocities committed in the name of Islam in foreign lands to back his assertion that Canadians should be wary of local Muslims [R1.1].

On 04 June 2015, the provincial Parliament passed Bill 77, the Affirming Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Act. In addition to banning conversion therapy for anyone under 18, it also makes sure that public health insurance won't cover it for anyone, of any age [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

On 08 September 2010, Justice C Aitken in the Ontario Supreme Court ruled that in not disclosing that he had sex with men, Kyle Freeman did commit negligent misrepresentation and was not shielded by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which does not apply to Canadian Blood Services [C2.1a], [C2.1b].

On 06 May 2010, an Ottawa man living with HIV was arrested and charged with nine counts of aggravated sexual assault after another man contacted authorities to report he had contracted the virus from him [R1.1].

On 29 December 2016, JJA David Watt, GJ Epstein and M Tulloch in the Court of Appeal overturned Justice M S Block's 07 July 2014 finding that Durham police breached the Charter rights of a suspected sex offender Kris Allan Gowdy when they publicly released information about his HIV status. The Court struck down a sentence of house arrest given Kris Gowdy for his conviction on a charge of child luring and replaced it with one of a year in jail. But that sentence was stayed, as Gowdy had already completed his original sentence [C2.7], [R2.6].

On 07 July 2014, Justice M S Block of the Ontario Court of Justice held that the police breached MFIPPA (the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act] and section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by disclosing an accused person’s status as HIV-positive without a reasonable belief that the individual posed a significant risk of harm to others however, the application for a stay of proceedings was denied [C2.5], [R2.4].

On 25 June 2012, the appeals from two men convicted of sexual assault because they did not disclose their HIV-positive status before having sex were delayed by the Ontario Court of Appeal as the legal test for conviction – which requires proof of  a significant risk of serious bodily harm – is under review by the Supreme Court of Canada [R2.3].

In 2009, an historic ruling found a Hamilton man, Johnson Aziga, guilty of first-degree murder, 10 counts of aggravated sexual assault and one count of attempted aggravated sexual assault in the deaths of two women he failed to tell he was HIV-positive [R2.2].

In February 2008, Judge Jon-Jo Douglas demanded a witness who has Hepatitis C and is also HIV positive wear a facemask when giving evidence before him [R2.1].

On 22 November 2017, Sharpe J. A. in the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of E.T. who sought to be notified by the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board of any classroom instruction or discussion of various issues such as ''moral relativism'', ''environmental worship'', ''instruction in sex education'', and ''discussion or portrayals of homosexual/bisexual conduct and relationships and/or transgenderism as natural, healthy or acceptable'' so that he could decide whether or not to withdraw his children from those classes or activities [C2.4], [R2.3].

On 27 May 2011, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled 6–3 that the conviction of her partner for sexual assault by anal penetration with a dildo be restored in the case where a woman lost consciousness in an act of erotic asphyxiation, her consent being dependent upon consciousness. The Court majority rejected the concept of advance consent [C2.2], [R2.1].

In June 2003, the City of Toronto issued North America's first full marriage licences to homosexual couples, after the Ontario Court of Appeal knocked down Canada's legal definition of marriage - the union of a man and a woman - as a violation of the country's Charter of Rights and Freedoms [R2.9].

In June 2003, according to the Toronto City Clerk and the provincial Registrar General, you do not have to be Canadian to get married in Ontario [R2.8]. Relevant forms can be downloaded on the Web - see full report.

Canadian law requires residency of one-year before a divorce may be obtained [R2.7].

In August 2002, a lesbian couple who received a marriage certificate from the Ontario provincial government may have the licence revoked because of media publicity. The couple was married by banns, a resurrection of an old tradition which doesn't require a licence from City Hall [R2.6].

In July 2001, the Ontario government marriage registrar refused to recognize two same-sex marriages performed by the Metropolitan Community Church of Toronto [R2.5].

On 14 January 2001, a gay couple and a lesbian couple married at a ceremony Sunday at the Metropolitan Community Church in Toronto were legally married because the church published banns for the pairs, the church’s minister insists [R2.4].

In December 2000, the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) of Toronto hoped to perform the world's first gay and lesbian marriages the old-fashioned way: by "publishing the banns of marriage" [R2.3].

In May 2000, the City of Toronto is broke new ground in asking the courts to decide if it could grant marriage licences to same-sex couples [R2.2].

In March 2000, a Commons justice committee studying Ottawa's same-sex legislation voted to include the definition of marriage in the proposed legislation stating that: "For greater certainty, the amendments made by this act do not affect the meaning of the word 'marriage,' that is, the lawful union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others" [R2.1].

3.

Courts & Tribunals

In October 2003, a five-member panel of Supreme Court judges unanimously rejected an appeal of the decision that legalized gay marriages in Ontario [R3.3].

On 12 July 2002, a three-judge Ontario Superior Court ruled that the Ontario government must recognize same-sex marriages under the law. Prohibiting gay couples from marrying is unconstitutional and violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, according to the court's unanimous decision. The Court has given Ontario two years to extend marriage rights to same-sex couples [R3.2].

In December 1996, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that the province's laws restricting the definition of marriage to only heterosexual couples was unconstitutional. The court also ruled that lesbian and gay partners have the same responsibilities towards each other as heterosexual common-law spouses. If the ruling were upheld by the Supreme Court, it would impose a form of marriage on every couple living together in a sexual relationship for more than three years regardless of the way the partners themselves define their roles [R3.1].

On 01June 2017, the ''Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act of 2017'' (Bill 89), was passed 63-23 (and received Royal Assent). The Act requires courts, social workers, and adoption services to consider ''race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression'' when making decisions concerning a child's welfare. That would include removing children from homes where parents oppose a child's embrace of homosexuality or ''gender'' choice [C1.8], [R1.7].

On 29 November 2016, the Ontario legislature unanimously passed Bill 28, the ''All Families Are Equal Act'', despite numerous MPPs being absent from the vote. The bill ensures equal parenting rights for same-sex couples who no longer have to adopt their own children. Further, where a child is conceived through assisted reproduction, the birth parent and the birth parent's partner at the time of the child's conception are recognised without requiring a court order [R1.6].

On 29 September 2016, the government introduced the All Families Are Equal Act which, if passed into law, would ensure all couples who use assisted reproduction to conceive, including the use of a surrogate, are legally recognized as parents [R1.5].

On 31 May 2016, Premier Kathleen Wynne says by the end of this year, the Ontario government will pass legislation to change the definition of parents so same-sex couples don't have to adopt their own children [L1.4].

On 10 December 2015, Bill 137: Cy and Ruby's Act passed the second reading stage and was referred to the Standing Committee. The Bill, if passed into law, will ensure lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender parents have legal rights to their own child, right from birth [L1.3], [R1.2].

Ontario allows same-sex couples to jointly adopt children [R1.1].

2.

Courts & Tribunals

In 2006, the Ontario Court of Appeal modernised the concept of the family by recognising a woman's right to be considered the third parent of her lesbian's partner's son, together with the child's biological parents [R2.1].

On 31 October 2012, Information and Privacy Commission adjudicator Stella Ball upheld the decision of the Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board (HWDSB) to deny access to the record of the speech Laura Wolfson, a homosexual activist, gave to children during a Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) assembly a year ago, saying she was not convinced that compelling public interest in disclosure arises out a need to know what publicly funded school boards are teaching students [R1.1].

On 05 June 2012, the Accepting Schools Act (Bill 13) passed 65 to 36. The bill received Royal Assent 19 June 2012, making it clear that effective 01 September 2012 [L1.3], sexual assault, gender-based violence and incidents based on homophobia (transphobia or biphobia) will not be tolerated in the province's elementary and secondary schools. An amendment also removed schools' veto over allowing students to set up clubs called Gay Straight Alliances [R1.2].

On 30 November 2011, Bill 13, the Accepting Schools Act was introduced, which if passed into law, would give students who engage in homophobic smears or beat up their classmates every opportunity to rehabilitate themselves, with expulsion reserved for the most extreme cases. [R1.1].

On 17 January 2016, the Divisional Court upheld the disciplinary committee's stripping Dr. Mary McIntyre of her medical licence for sexually abusing mentally ill female Patient Y was appropriate and in the public interest and also ordered McIntyre to pay $10,000 to cover the legal costs of the appeal. The committee had previously ordered her to reimburse the $16,060 the college had paid to her patients and another $13,380 for legal costs [R2.5].

On 06 January 2016, a Crown attorney told a Toronto court that the prosecution was not going to pursue a new trial against Joshua Dowholis, who was on parole after having already served more than five years in prison (including pretrial custody). Dowholis was convicted on 27 September 2013 of sexually assaulting three men he met in a downtown Toronto bathhouse (see below). The staying of charges means Dowholis will not have a criminal record in connection to the initial charges of sexually assaulting the three men he met in the bathhouse [R2.4].

On 31 October 2016, the Court of Appeal quashed the conviction of Joshua Dowholis for sexual assault of three men he met in a Toronto bathhouse as a consequence of the jury foreman Derek Welsman making homophobic jokes about the trial on the Dean Blundell radio show and disclosed details of jury deliberations. The Court ordered a new trial after it found the juror's conduct undermined the perceived fairness of the justice system [R2.4], [C2.3].

On 17 March 2016, Adjudicator Alison Renton in the Human Rights Tribunal found that transgender man Caesar Lewis was bullied, beaten and humiliated in a washroom at Sugar Daddys Nightclub by a security guard, ordering the nightclub to pay Lewis $15,000 compensation and provide human rights training to all staff. There was no appearance at the hearing by the nightclub [C2.2], [R2.1].